1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 17, 2016, around 16:00, the Plaintiff suffered injury due to a traffic accident that occurred in the vicinity of the Chungcheong Highway (hereinafter “instant accident”) while driving a vehicle in Daegu to transport wastes from the Pacific.

B. The Plaintiff applied for first medical care to the Defendant on the ground that the instant accident sustained injury, such as the injury of the scopical water from the scopical scopical scopical scopical scopical scopical scopical scopical scopical sc

C. As to this, on August 3, 2016, the Defendant changed the “salvine damage to the salvine salvine and the salvine salvine salvine to the salvine salvine,” and issued a disposition to approve the “salvine salvine” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without any dispute, Gap's 1, 3, Eul's 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the injury and disease in the instant case occurred due to the instant accident, and even if the Plaintiff had an existing disease, since the existing disease and disease sharply aggravated due to the instant accident, it should be deemed that there exists a proximate causal relation between the injury and the instant accident.

Nevertheless, in rendering the instant disposition, the Defendant changed the injury and disease of the instant case to the scopical salt pane, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful and unjust.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. 1) Determination of occupational accident refers to an accident caused by an employee’s occupational performance while performing his/her duties, and there is a proximate causal relation between the employee’s occupational and the accident. In this case, the causal relation between the employee’s occupational and the accident must be proved by the assertion of such causal relation. 2) As to this case, the statement of No. 3, No. 3, No. 3, and No. 4, and the result of the court’s physical entrustment to the director of the branch hospital of Eul University.